T1B

Dumbass wrote:Here you go, Paully. You may need this for your nose after you pull it from B's asshole.

Yea, cause Paul and I agree on SO much.

Dinsdale wrote:Rule says you can't go into a blocker's knees when attempting to make a tackle.

The rule says you can't throw a low block.

Tackling, last I checked, was legal.

Uhhh....I was being sarcastic?

For some reason, I've heard very very very very few neutral fans complaining about the officiating. Oddly enough, at the large party I attended, the Seahawks fans thought that they got robbed, the Steelers fans thought they were getting the short end of the stick, and the nuetral parties didn't think the officiating was all that bad.

I'd love to be discussing individual plays too, but the Melty McMeltersteins of the world have to wrap the whole thing up in some conspiracy theory, based on...I don't know what it's based on, but it wasn't the game I watched.

Seattle fans think that trying to put a black eye on this game will make their effort look less feeble years ferom now or something.

Every one of those "controversial calls" was correct, both in my opinion, and according to the same NFL rules that govern every other game that's played. You can bitch about minutiae in every game, and of this minutiae, I think Pittsburg got what little "short end" of the stick there was, but it certainly didn't æffect the outcome of the game.

Bottom line -- Big Ben gets to go to Disneyland and fuck the prom queen, Hasselbeck is a fucking loser.

And Jerremy Stevens will now be that "one guy" who people still remember 20 years later as being "that fucking idiot." Because almost every year, some tard that nobody has heard of, and won't hear of again, has to go and run his mouth, and over the 40 year history of the SB, I believe the team that has "that fucking idiot" is 0-40.

This is a non-issue, except to the losers.

WhatsMyName wrote: The rule says you can't throw a low block.

DO try and keep up --

Hasselbeck's team didn't have the ball.

Get back to me when you figure out what you're trying to say. Maybe try taking the marbles out of your mouth when you type or something.


Mo -- you'll note I said that YOU are the exception. Save your breath -- I already had YOU labelled before any of this came up. And there's absolutely nothing you can do to undo years upon years upon years worth of damage that your shit fans have done.

I do think it will be priceless when in future years, the Seahawks try and sue people when they use the word "bandwagon."

And sorry. Sorry to all of the conspiracy theorists. I'm sorry that you didn't find the game exciting enough, and now to get your money's worth you flat out have to make up stupid shit the next day. If you want to see what happens when the refs put the whistles away in favor a "enhanced fairness" or whatever you sissies want, just go watch a replay of the Chicago Bulls of the 90's...what a hoot that was. "Just let that guy who travels every single time he touches the ball settle it on the court."

Me -- I'll take a game where the same rules apply to everybody -- like Sunday's Super Bowl, for example.

Dinsdale wrote:

WhatsMyName wrote: The rule says you can't throw a low block.

DO try and keep up --

Hasselbeck's team didn't have the ball.

Get back to me when you figure out what you're trying to say. Maybe try taking the marbles out of your mouth when you type or something.

What did the ref specifically say after the play ended?

WhatsMyName wrote: The rule says you can't throw a low block.

The rules say that the team that wins the coin toss may elect to either kick or recieve the kickoff.

The rules say that a player recieving a punt may signal for a fair catch.

The rules say a FG is worth 3 points.

These rules also have about as much to do with the point at hand as the rule you brought up does.

What do rules governing when you can and can't throw a low block have to do with taking out a blocker's knees?

You lost me. Doesn't really matter though, since Hasselbeck committed arguably THE most punk foul in the entire sport. In front of an official, and about 90,000,000 witnesses. Sorry if you don't like the rule, but I hardly see that as a reason to not enforce it. It was of little consequence anyway, since Seattle was bound and determined to give up however many yards it took to put 6 on the wrong side of the scoreboard on the next play.

KC Paul 3.0 wrote:I DARE you. :twisted:

I dare you?

What a fucking dork.

Maybe you should concentrate more on getting your first piece of pussy before you turn 50 instead of calling people out.

jiminphilly wrote:
1. The Steelers would have scored if the ref's marked the ball on the 1cm line after Ben got tackled. His name is Bettis and there is no way he'd be denied that endzone.
2. I agree on the Jackson TD.
3. Holding happens on every play. Arguing about holding in the NFL is a complete joke.


Speaking Stephens, you know that one drop was actually a fumble right?

Yeah....and Bettis NEVER fumbles at the one yard line.........(thanks you ever said this before) AND Seattle hadn't stopped teh first three running plays either

Dinsdale wrote:

WhatsMyName wrote: The rule says you can't throw a low block.

The rules say that the team that wins the coin toss may elect to either kick or recieve the kickoff.

The rules say that a player recieving a punt may signal for a fair catch.

The rules say a FG is worth 3 points.

These rules also have about as much to do with the point at hand as the rule you brought up does.

What do rules governing when you can and can't throw a low block have to do with taking out a blocker's knees?

You lost me. Doesn't really matter though, since Hasselbeck committed arguably THE most punk foul in the entire sport. In front of an official, and about 90,000,000 witnesses. Sorry if you don't like the rule, but I hardly see that as a reason to not enforce it. It was of little consequence anyway, since Seattle was bound and determined to give up however many yards it took to put 6 on the wrong side of the scoreboard on the next play.

Uh, answer my question dude.

What did the ref specifically say after the play ended?

Dimsdale;
Who was credited with tackling Taylor after the interception?

And keep in mind that a tackle is not the same thing as a block.

Thanks for playing.

Hello?

Believe it or not, it's possible to be credited with a tackle during a play in which you commit a penalty.

And you people are REALLY losing me with this "block" stuff.

Maybe typing slowly will help?

The team that doesn't have the ball can't "block."

I dunno, maybe if you guys read that 100 more times, it will sink in?

Not sure why some of you keep refering to Hasselbeck making a "block?" The Steelers players were the ones "blocking" -- becuase they had the ball. If this confuses anyone, they should probably leave the football discussions for those who have actually seen a game before. Matter of fact, Hasselbeck made a tackle by diving through the knees of one of these "blockers," an act of complete bitchness that was banned years ago, for a damned good reason.

Hasselbeck went into a blocker's knees. It is illegal to go into a blocker's knees, under any circumstances. I'm not sure which part of this some of you aren't understanding, but really -- it's a foul, and it drew a penalty. I can't think of any rational explaination as to why the refs should have let that offense go.

If that's the extent of your "conspiracy theory," it's time to move on.

Um, that is how they defined it during the game. I said the same thing. How can the team trying to tackle get flagged for a block...they aren't freaking blocking.

Raydah James wrote:8766 posts of unreadable horseshit and counting.......

8787 and counting = a busy day of bullshit.

Dumbass wrote:[align=center]Um, that is how they defined it during the game. I said the same thing. How can the team trying to tackle get flagged for a block...they aren't freaking blocking.[/align]

Thank you.

And you're still a dumbass, just not this time. :P

Dinsdale wrote:OK, I'm going to try larger text this time.

Hasselbeck was flagged for going into the knees of someone trying to block him.

Not "blocking below the knees," ...

Better check the ref again there, pal.

One call that clearly appeared erroneous came after that penalty, when Hasselbeck threw an interception to Pittsburgh's Ike Taylor, then made the tackle but was called for a block below the waist, giving the Steelers an extra 15 yards. They scored soon afterward on a pass from Antwaan Randle El to Hines Ward. Replays showed Hasselbeck never made contact with the player he was supposed to have hit illegally, instead going straight to Taylor to make the tackle.

link

And you never answered my question. Surprise!!!!

WhatsMyName wrote:

One call that clearly appeared erroneous came after that penalty, when Hasselbeck threw an interception to Pittsburgh's Ike Taylor, then made the tackle but was called for a block below the waist, giving the Steelers an extra 15 yards. They scored soon afterward on a pass from Antwaan Randle El to Hines Ward. Replays showed Hasselbeck never made contact with the player he was supposed to have hit illegally, instead going straight to Taylor to make the tackle.

link

And you never answered my question. Surprise!!!!

Still having your opinions spoon fed to you by ESPN?

Shocking.

T REX wrote:

jiminphilly wrote:
1. The Steelers would have scored if the ref's marked the ball on the 1cm line after Ben got tackled. His name is Bettis and there is no way he'd be denied that endzone.
2. I agree on the Jackson TD.
3. Holding happens on every play. Arguing about holding in the NFL is a complete joke.


Speaking Stephens, you know that one drop was actually a fumble right?

Yeah....and Bettis NEVER fumbles at the one yard line.........(thanks you ever said this before) AND Seattle hadn't stopped teh first three running plays either

Over Bettis's career he's made it a habit of getting into the endzone from the one yard line a lot more than he's fumbled. If you want to point to one game where Bettis fumbled and said that's the norm for him you're a fucking tool. Pitt's offensive line also has this habit of creating gigantic holes at important times of the game (see the hole Willie Parker had to run through). I think the probability is Bettis gets in.

Why argue that play? It was a TD. It doesn't matter what Roethlisberg thinks since he was looking forward. From the goal line angle it looked to me that the nose of the football broke the plane. It also looked the same to the referee standing on the goal line. Forget where the ball ended up, there's a rule in the league called forward progress.

Another big Rack for Moorese. Some of you guys seem to have missed the whole game, but for a few plays.

The Steelers defense stiffened in the second half. There were several crushing sacks of Hasslebeck. There was the pick he threw. There was the unexpected deer-in-the-headlights routine from Holmgren.

PSUFAN wrote:Some of you guys seem to have missed the whole game, but for a few plays.

A few plays is all it takes. In fact, it only takes one.

Can you remember another post-season where there's been this much talk surrounding the officials??? Head in the sand much?

If Roethlisberger doesn't make that tackle after the Bettis blunder, you have a different Super Bowl champion. You were a cunt hair away from having that game taken away from you because of the officials' incompetence. Would you be okay with that?

UCant Unretires Again wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:Some of you guys seem to have missed the whole game, but for a few plays.

A few plays is all it takes. In fact, it only takes one.

Can you remember another post-season where there's been this much talk surrounding the officials???

It's all contrived by the media.

Sincerely,
BSmacked

You were a cunt hair away from having that game taken away from you because of the officials' incompetence. Would you be okay with that?

Hell, I'm used to it, already. I guess you don't know much about Penn State football in recent years.

As for the game hinging on one play...which play are you referring to? The El TD pass? The Parker TD run? The Ike Taylor pick? One of the sacks the Steelers got in the second half?

Look - the Steelers sacked up and won the thing outright in the second half. After Ben's horrific int and the subsequent Seattle TD, the game was basically there for either team to take. The Steelers took it, while the Chickens choked.

The Seattle fan(s) in this forum that care to weigh in have done so in comprehensive, rackable fashion. What we have remaining are a few axegrinders.

PSUFAN wrote:Hell, I'm used to it, already.

Yes or no... can you recall another NFL post-season having more controversy regarding the officials?

Seeing as how your team took home the trophy, I guess you can be excused for turning a blind eye to an obvious problem.

UCant Unretires Again wrote:If Roethlisberger doesn't make that tackle after the Bettis blunder, you have a different Super Bowl champion.

Would have been the 2nd time in 5 years that such a thing happened.

No problem.

poptart wrote:

UCant Unretires Again wrote:If Roethlisberger doesn't make that tackle after the Bettis blunder, you have a different Super Bowl champion.

Would have been the 2nd time in 5 years that such a thing happened.

No problem.

Leave it to the poster boy for Bitter Raider fan to make an appearance.



Now we just need War Ring to punch out a fence or two.

Here's the obvious problem that I think is of primary importance. We've obviously entered a new era in football, both college and pro - one in which fans feel entitles to interpret calls as they see fit, according to their rooting interests.

If you want to stage a game, you have to admit to a certain human error element. The game has to be officiated by humans. Humans can and will fail.

If you want to provide an opportunity for close calls to be looked at, you get some kind of replay system, and hope that it can address the complexities of the game adequately.

So - now that most of that is in place, folks seem to be forgetting that not all calls will go they way they want them to. They imagine that their rooting interests are one and the same with the "right calls". No one serves as oversight for inept fans, like they do officials.

Here's a solution that the Steelers have employed well this season...when there is a crappy call that might take the game away from you, you sack up and work on scoring some more points, and stopping your opponent from doing so. You do what you can to take the game out of the hands of the officials.

Penn State had a game against Michigan that hinged on official involvement. While I as a PSU fan feel that there were blown calls and non-calls, I recognize that PSU had opportunities to win the game that they blew. They could have executed better, and it was their failure to do so that caused them to lose the game, more so than a failure on the part of officiating.

This year, it's the Steelers...but the way things are going, we're not going to be free and clear from officiating controversy in football any time soon. Pandora's box has been opened.

Fans have always cried about officiating, so that part of the current equation is business as usual.

The problem is replay.

Replay has led fans to the presumption that many ills will be corrected, many wrongs made right.

But, the exact opposite happens.

Leaving the game on the field is the correct course of action for the NFL to take.

Replay has led fans to the presumption that many ills will be corrected, many wrongs made right - according to their rooting interests.

FTFY

PSUFAN wrote:Here's the obvious problem that I think is of primary importance. We've obviously entered a new era in football, both college and pro - one in which fans feel entitles to interpret calls as they see fit, according to their rooting interests.

Let's take that one step further. Fans not only feel free to interpret calls. They also are doing so without the slightest understanding of the rule book. I refer you to the fans who still won't let the tuck rule or Bert Emanuel's non catch exit their freaking domes.

Christ, I was posting on these boards when Phil Luckett fucked up a simple coin toss. I didn't blame Luckett's bad call for the Steelers losing that game. I blamed the Steelers for allowing themselves to be put in that position.

BSmack wrote:Christ, I was posting on these boards when Phil Luckett fucked up a simple coin toss.

Wow... you've sucked for that long? UNRACK your Sysiphean existence.

UCant Unretires Again wrote:

BSmack wrote:Christ, I was posting on these boards when Phil Luckett fucked up a simple coin toss.

Wow... you've sucked for that long? UNRACK your Sysiphean existence.

The amazing thing is that it only feels like you've been ankle biting me that long.

How can I ankle someone who has me on "ignore"?

UCant Unretires Again wrote:How can I ankle someone who has me on "ignore"?

Answer that and you might finaly get a clue.

Your dome is attracted to my boot like Bettis is to a bucket of extra crispy.

End... of... story.

You guys seem to forget that Seattle was, in fact, part of the AFC West for many years. They never won a divisional title or a road game during that time period, and the closest they ever got to the playoffs was when Steve Largent sang the National Anthem in drag at Oakland Alameda County Correctional Facilitesseum to rave reviews. All of this proves, of course, that Shaun Alexander should spell his name with a "w" if he wants to keep his lunch money.